If we want to closely observe the original behavior of the glass for the particular dimension, stress strain curve during three point bending are less popular due to a huge variation in glass response and dimension depended glass response lead to non reliable generalized (dimension independent) stress-strain response. Load-deformation curve is more relevant ?
Please share your opinion, Thanks.
In ceramic and glassy materials, a strain-stress curve is essentially irrelevant because of a principle absence in these materials clearly distinguished mechanism of plastic deformation. In glasses (which are, actually, surer-cooled liquid with extremely high viscosity making them "similar" to solids), a temperature increase results in a significant decrease of viscosity. This process is accomplished with a "plastic" deformation, but in this case the deformation-load curve is also low-informative. What is usually done with glasses and ceramics is a flexure testing. Sometimes, three- or four-point bending is performed to calculate a rupture stress. Anyway, enormously wide dispersion of the obtained testing results is a reason for use Weibull statistics for a proper interpretation.
The output of 3P/ 4P/ROR testing is given by load-deformation or stress-strain curve. Comparative Relevance is again a question. Statistical tool are in any case needed essentially for non uniform data. I am not sure about if dimension dependent load-deformation is more relevant or dimension independent stress-strain curve !
https://www.sciencedirect.com/search?qs=Stress-strain%20or%20load-deformation%20which%20curve%20is%20more%20relevant&show=25&sortBy=relevance
you will never get a stress strain diagram for glass as glass is 100% brittle material
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Physical Sciences
- Materials Science